St. George's Marathon is this weekend. Just remember that's not actually your real PR.

Real Running wrote:

Oct 06 2007 St G: 2:18:09

One month later at the OTM: 02:22:34

incomplete time line wrote:

So you ran St George in 2007 and then are comparing it to marathons you ran 3 or more years later?

Went home devastated.

Isn't grandmas aided as well?

Bring Back the 880 wrote:

Isn't grandmas aided as well?

It's over. Off for a run...

Real Running wrote:

Three times US Olympic Trials

Marathon: 2:17:54 (Grandma's) - 2014)

Marathon: 2:19:47 (Indianapolis Monumental - 2013)

Marathon: 2:19:49 (Indianapolis Monumental - 2010)

Aided PR's:

Marathon: 2:18:09 (St George - 2007)

Marathon: 2:17:35 (Boston - 2011)

What's your story bro?

Brotein Shake....get this nonsense out of here. 7 years later lol.

Real Running wrote:

Three times US Olympic Trials

Marathon: 2:17:54 (Grandma's) - 2014)

Marathon: 2:19:47 (Indianapolis Monumental - 2013)

Marathon: 2:19:49 (Indianapolis Monumental - 2010)

Aided PR's:

Marathon: 2:18:09 (St George - 2007)

Marathon: 2:17:35 (Boston - 2011)

What's your story bro?

Cool story, bro.

I mean Paul Peterson.

Real Running wrote:

Real Running wrote:

Oct 06 2007 St G: 2:18:09

One month later at the OTM: 02:22:34

Went home devastated.

Exhibit A: The Humble Brag.

Exhibit A wrote:

Real Running wrote:

Went home devastated.

Exhibit A: The Humble Brag.

Indeed, if it were Paul...

Real Running wrote:

Exhibit A wrote:

Exhibit A: The Humble Brag.

Indeed, if it were Paul...

Letsrun allows a lot of crap on these boards, but impersonating another person is not allowed.

#5

Dude... if you were as fast as Paul and half as good a guy you would have it made! Get a life and quit bawling. It's like Paul once told me and my other St George bro's, "St George isn't as easy as people outside of Utah think it is, and it isn't as hard as locals think it is."

Exhibit A wrote:

Real Running wrote:

Indeed, if it were Paul...

Letsrun allows a lot of crap on these boards, but impersonating another person is not allowed.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/TOS.php

#5

Where did I impersonate Paul? I posted some of his stats to counter some of the earlier posts. You inferred from my post...

Real Running wrote:

Exhibit A wrote:

Letsrun allows a lot of crap on these boards, but impersonating another person is not allowed.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/TOS.php

#5

Where did I impersonate Paul? I posted some of his stats to counter some of the earlier posts. You inferred from my post...

"What's your story bro" insinuates that the times listed are yours and you and are asking for other's times.

Of course I inferred wrote:

Real Running wrote:

Where did I impersonate Paul? I posted some of his stats to counter some of the earlier posts. You inferred from my post...

"What's your story bro" insinuates that the times listed are yours and you and are asking for other's times.

No, again, you inferred something that wasn't implied. In no way have I insinuated/stated that the times were mine. But the point here is that Paul has pretty much matched his St G time at Boston and other courses, which counters the posts about St G being a straightforward gimme. Maybe everything isn't quite so black and white.

When this was posted: "So you ran St George in 2007 and then are comparing it to marathons you ran 3 or more years later?"

you responded with "Oct 06 2007 St G: 2:18:09

One month later at the OTM: 02:22:34"

and later with "Went home devastated."

In no way did you take the opportunity to clarify that the times weren't yours even when asked a direct question about them.

So pardon the confusion, but can you maybe see how one might think you were talking about yourself (Paul Peterson)?

Of course I inferred wrote:

When this was posted: "So you ran St George in 2007 and then are comparing it to marathons you ran 3 or more years later?"

you responded with "Oct 06 2007 St G: 2:18:09

One month later at the OTM: 02:22:34"

and later with "Went home devastated."

In no way did you take the opportunity to clarify that the times weren't yours even when asked a direct question about them.

So pardon the confusion, but can you maybe see how one might think you were talking about yourself (Paul Peterson)?

Yes, you're right. The confusion is understandable. My apologies.

Now then, who's going to win this weekend? Will the winner, like our hero, Paul, replicate their performance on an unaided course? (For the record, it won't be me: I wouldn't run a downhill marathon.)

Real Running wrote:

Of course I inferred wrote:

When this was posted: "So you ran St George in 2007 and then are comparing it to marathons you ran 3 or more years later?"

you responded with "Oct 06 2007 St G: 2:18:09

One month later at the OTM: 02:22:34"

and later with "Went home devastated."

In no way did you take the opportunity to clarify that the times weren't yours even when asked a direct question about them.

So pardon the confusion, but can you maybe see how one might think you were talking about yourself (Paul Peterson)?

Yes, you're right. The confusion is understandable. My apologies.

Now then, who's going to win this weekend? Will the winner, like our hero, Paul, replicate their performance on an unaided course? (For the record, it won't be me: I wouldn't run a downhill marathon.)

Fair enough.

I still don't think Paul's times really prove your point. The times alone don't account for any other variables like improved fitness, etc.

I think, given that Paul ran 2:22:XX less than a month later at the OTM, suggests he was in and around 2:20 shape (all things being equal - note, he ran TOU as a training run in September too). Over the years, Paul has been in and around 2:18-2:22 (with some slower runs).There hasn't really been a spike in performance. He has consistently performed well.

Paul's record speaks for itself.

Hardrock 100 wrote:

St. George ought to reverse the course every other year. One year downhill. Next year uphill.

That's the only way I would ever run it. Uphill!

Real Running wrote:

I think, given that Paul ran 2:22:XX less than a month later at the OTM, suggests he was in and around 2:20 shape (all things being equal - note, he ran TOU as a training run in September too). Over the years, Paul has been in and around 2:18-2:22 (with some slower runs).There hasn't really been a spike in performance. He has consistently performed well.

Paul's record speaks for itself.

Dude, you've lost all credibility by impersonating someone else. Scared the fire out of you when you realized you blatantly broke some major rules. Now you talk about Paul 3rd person clearly trying distance yourself from the impersonation. Mods, should just ban your sorry IP.

Real Running wrote:

I think, given that Paul ran 2:22:XX less than a month later at the OTM, suggests he was in and around 2:20 shape (all things being equal - note, he ran TOU as a training run in September too). Over the years, Paul has been in and around 2:18-2:22 (with some slower runs).There hasn't really been a spike in performance. He has consistently performed well.

Paul's record speaks for itself.

This indicates nothing. Since you're not Paul, for all you know, Paul may have known he got the OTQ and eased up to save himself for the trials a few weeks later.